AG-2026.04-525·quant-ph·cross-listed: gr-qcnucl-th
Rank-2 Electromagnetic Backgrounds and Angular Momentum Barriers in Gravitomagnetic Spin-Quadrupole Searches
Authors
- Leonardo A. Pachon
Abstract
We present a complete analysis of the angular momentum selection rules and electromagnetic backgrounds that constrain any spectroscopic search for the gravitomagnetic spin-quadrupole coupling in highly charged ions. A sequence of four barriers is identified: (i)~the Wigner-Eckart theorem mandates $j \geq 3/2$ electronic states for sensitivity to the rank-2 gravitomagnetic operator, excluding the deformation-immune $j=1/2$ states; (ii)~the nuclear electric quadrupole hyperfine interaction (HFS-E2) generates an $\sim 18$-orders-of-magnitude electromagnetic background in the required $j=3/2$ channel; (iii)~second-order HFS mixing between fine-structure levels leaves a residual $\sim 10^{-6}$ eV even after centroid extraction; (iv)~tensor nuclear polarizability (TNP), scaling with $B(E2)$ rather than $Q_s$, introduces an independent rank-2 background of $\sim 10^{-12}$ eV. We derive the algebraic conditions under which a multi-isotope, multi-transition Generalized King Plot can separate these backgrounds from the gravitational signal, and show that the minimum experimental topology requires three transitions and $N_{\text{odd}} \geq N_{\text{bkg}} + 1$ odd-spin isotopes with linearly independent nuclear parameters. For the molybdenum chain, this yields a first laboratory-derivable bound $|χ- 1| \lesssim 10^{8} - 10^9$ on the gyrogravitational ratio, limited by current precision on nuclear quadrupole moments and transition rates. We quantify the experimental milestones needed to improve this bound by each order of magnitude, providing a roadmap for future searches.
Submitted
22 April 20265 days ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.20717
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.